Lean Was Supposed to Help
When I first began studying Lean, I was excited.
The tools made sense.
The principles made sense.
And the potential was obvious.
I could see how Lean could improve the organization where I worked.
But something unexpected happened.
The Lean I was studying didn’t look anything like the Lean I was seeing.
One of the first Lean initiatives I witnessed was 6S.
From the very beginning, it was treated as housekeeping.
People were told what to do.
Checklists appeared.
Audits appeared.
But very little effort was spent helping people understand why any of it mattered.
What should have been a powerful improvement tool became just another task on someone’s to-do list.
And when the initiative struggled, people became frustrated.
The workers felt like Lean was simply creating more work.
Leadership became frustrated because participation wasn’t what they expected.
The entire effort slowly lost momentum.
After a few months, people drifted back to the old way of doing things.
Unfortunately, that wasn’t a one-time event.
I watched the same pattern repeat itself over and over again.
The Problem I Couldn't Ignore
The more Lean initiatives I observed, the more confused I became.
The tools themselves weren’t the problem.
Good people were struggling.
Good leaders were struggling.
Organizations were investing significant time and effort into improvement efforts that rarely gained traction.
One example has stayed with me for years.
A company used a 6S audit checklist they found online.
The problem was that the checklist had been designed for office environments, not for the work being performed on the shop floor.
Employees were understandably confused.
Even more concerning, when leaders were asked what some of the checklist items actually meant, they often weren’t completely sure themselves.
Everyone was trying to follow the process.
Very few people actually understood it.
The result was predictable.
Confusion increased.
Participation declined.
Credibility suffered.
And Lean became harder to take seriously each time a new initiative was introduced.
What troubled me most was seeing the wrong people get blamed.
Workers were labeled resistant.
Teams were labeled disengaged.
Meanwhile, leaders were left wondering why the tools weren’t producing the results they expected.
The tools didn’t seem to be working.
But I wasn’t convinced the tools were actually the problem.
The Discovery
Almost immediately, I felt that something important was missing.
Understanding.
People were being asked to participate in improvement initiatives they didn’t fully understand.
They didn’t always understand:
- Why the initiative existed
- What problem it was trying to solve
- What success looked like
- How the tool was supposed to help
That realization stayed with me.
Over time, it became clear that the problem wasn’t simply a lack of Lean knowledge.
The problem was that people throughout organizations often understood the same initiative differently.
That realization eventually became what I now call The Understanding Gap™.
The Understanding Gap™ exists when people believe they understand the same thing, but their understandings are meaningfully different.
And when understanding differs:
- Participation differs.
- Ownership differs.
- Decisions differ.
- Results differ.
The more organizations I observed, the more clearly I saw the same pattern.
Understanding was often assumed.
Very rarely was it verified.
That observation eventually led to another principle:
Understanding Before Improvement™
Because people can only contribute meaningfully to a game they understand.
Why I Created To Be Lean™
To Be Lean™ began with a simple goal:
Help people understand Lean.
At first, I focused on helping people gain a practical understanding of Lean tools and principles.
I wanted to explain not only what the tools do, but why they exist.
I wanted to help organizations achieve better results from their improvement efforts.
But over time, the mission became much bigger.
I realized organizations didn’t simply need more Lean training.
They needed shared understanding.
They needed a way to identify where understanding existed, where it was lacking, and where different groups were operating from different assumptions.
Today, To Be Lean™ exists to help organizations create the understanding necessary for meaningful participation, genuine ownership, and sustainable improvement.
Because improvement becomes much easier when people understand:
- Where they’re going
- Why they’re going
- What success looks like
- How improvement tools support the journey
- The role they play in achieving it
The Understanding Gap™.
Understanding Before Improvement™.
The To Be Lean House™.
The Shared Understanding Assessment™.
All of these emerged from a single observation:
People can only contribute meaningfully to a game they understand.
A Final Thought
Most organizations don’t suffer from a lack of effort.
Most don’t suffer from a lack of good people.
Most don’t suffer from a lack of good intentions.
What many organizations suffer from are understanding gaps.
And when understanding becomes shared, participation improves.
Ownership improves.
Decision-making improves.
And sustainable improvement becomes far more likely.
That’s why To Be Lean™ exists.
Understanding Before Improvement™
Because people can only contribute meaningfully to a game they understand.